I'm extremely impressed with this utility - been looking for something with its core functionality for ages. I actually had a dream about it last night, and it had one more feature: the ability to sort by aspect ratio, with a percentage tolerance. This would be ideal for getting a set of pictures from your collection that will fit your screen resolution if you use a wallpaper prog that can resize pictures, like the awesome John's Background Switcher.

It would also be useful to limit the sort by a minimum pixel count, so as to only get pictures over a certain size within the tolerance range specified for the aspect ratio, like so:- Enter minimum pixel count (eg. 1200000): [_____]

It's rare that a utility makes such a strong impression on me that it occupies my dreams, so I hope that my above suggestions are sensible and might make their way into this awesome software.

You want all images with aspect ratios between 1.73 and 1.81 sorted into a folder named 16-9 (colons are forbidden in file/folder names). Is this along the lines of what you had in mind?

That pretty much nails it, yes. I know I'd make a hell of a lot of use of that specific functionality, I don't know how other people on here feel, but it would make organising my pictures so much easier. Being able to set the lower pixel count (or maybe a lower and upper limit, but let's not get too carried away) would ensure you wouldn't get pictures of too-low resolution to be used as wallpapers.

Works perfectly. The only thing that's a bit cumbersome is not having the ability to stop the process once it's started, and the app not remembering the previously-used settings. But that's just nitpicking - you've done really awesome work on this!

Don't know if you're still able/want to work on this, and hope this doesn't offend in anyway, but purely for selfish reasons, had a few of thoughts on possible enhancements:

1. when a user inputs a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for having the images put into folders with the greatest common denominator equivalents of the given resolutions, ie a 'reduce to gcd' option (eg. 1200x900 reduces to 4:3); or alternatively, a 'reduce to decimal' option (eg. 1200x900 reduces to 1.33, or 1.333 - whatever sig fig is specified);

2. in the same way that a user is allowed to input a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for inputting a list of acceptable aspect ratios, using either improper fractions (eg 400:300) or decimals (eg 1.33)

2. for the second, list driven, sort method, have alternative option: in the same way that a user is allowed to input a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for inputting a list of acceptable aspect ratios, using either improper fractions (eg 400x300, 040x030, etc) or decimals (eg 1.33, 001.333, etc)

3. for all sorting have the option to sort portrait equivalents in the the same folder as their landscape counterparts, eg, have a check box 'inverse ratios in same folder' or similar, which if ticked, would for example allow all images 3:4 to be sorted into the same folder as all images 4:3

1. when a user inputs a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for having the images put into folders with the greatest common denominator equivalents of the given resolutions, ie a 'reduce to gcd' option (eg. 1200x900 reduces to 4:3); or alternatively, a 'reduce to decimal' option (eg. 1200x900 reduces to 1.33, or 1.333 - whatever sig fig is specified);

2. in the same way that a user is allowed to input a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for inputting a list of acceptable aspect ratios, using either improper fractions (eg 400:300) or decimals (eg 1.33)

I think both of these requests could be handled by making the aspect ratio section into a list-driven setup like the resolution section.

I want to leave the first option as is since that was what the initial program request was for. Also, I don't understand the need for all those padding requests. Maybe it's so stuff lines up in a file manager that's using a fixed-width font? At any rate, I think it's out of scope for this application and would be better suited to a dedicated file/folder renaming application.

2. for the second, list driven, sort method, have alternative option: in the same way that a user is allowed to input a list of acceptable resolutions, would it be possible to incorporate a facility for inputting a list of acceptable aspect ratios, using either improper fractions (eg 400x300, 040x030, etc) or decimals (eg 1.33, 001.333, etc)

As I mentioned earlier, I think I'll change the aspect ratio section into a list-driven interface. Again, I don't understand the need for all the padded value stuff.

3. for all sorting have the option to sort portrait equivalents in the the same folder as their landscape counterparts, eg, have a check box 'inverse ratios in same folder' or similar, which if ticked, would for example allow all images 3:4 to be sorted into the same folder as all images 4:3

I'll consider this as well. Apologies for the late reply; I've been on a business trip all week.

Apologies, but there are so many limits, gotchas and caveats when working with these that I think it's just asking for trouble. Also, I don't run Vista or Windows 7, except in VMs for testing purposes, so trying to develop this would be even more difficult.

First of all to say my congratulations to skwire who created the Dimensions2Folders which proved a powerful tool for me!I'm a graphic designer and in combination with the Arti tool I can easily classify many images.

But the reason I came to write is that yesterday I realized that Dimensions 2 Folders shows malfunction Specifically in the uppper/lower total pixels range option fields.First I noticed that the official site the names of the 2 fields is written upside down in relation to the application you've downloaded it ...but this is the easy part!

What concerns me more, however is that the two fields do not work at all... or i do something wrong!

Specifically I tried it and I put in the source folder 7 image which have the same aspect ratio 1:1 (150p / 300p / 450p / 600p / 750p / 900p / 1050p).

I started and gave Aspect Ratio 1:1 and Upper limit 700 pixels (lower on my case), which is to say that the source folder will be sent to the destination folder the images which do not exceed 700pixel, and in order case that will get only the first 4 images.

Unfortunately any rate i put in the Upper limit field takes all 7 files and puts them in the destination folder. As the program don't recognizes the rate numbers i give!

Thanks again for your time. I expect is there any solution to this problem, Friendly Panos.

First of all to say my congratulations to skwire who created the Dimensions2Folders which proved a powerful tool for me!I'm a graphic designer and in combination with the Arti tool I can easily classify many images.

But the reason I came to write is that yesterday I realized that Dimensions 2 Folders shows malfunction Specifically in the uppper/lower total pixels range option fields.First I noticed that the official site the names of the 2 fields is written upside down in relation to the application you've downloaded it ...but this is the easy part!

What concerns me more, however is that the two fields do not work at all... or i do something wrong!

Specifically I tried it and I put in the source folder 7 image which have the same aspect ratio 1:1 (150p / 300p / 450p / 600p / 750p / 900p / 1050p).

I started and gave Aspect Ratio 1:1 and Upper limit 700 pixels (lower on my case), which is to say that the source folder will be sent to the destination folder the images which do not exceed 700pixel, and in order case that will get only the first 4 images.

Unfortunately any rate i put in the Upper limit field takes all 7 files and puts them in the destination folder. As the program don't recognizes the rate numbers i give!

Thanks again for your time. I expect is there any solution to this problem, Friendly Panos.

In the right screenshot the top field is lower limit and in the left screenshot it is upper limit. Perhaps the problem?

Hello, I have found a tiny bug in the application Dimensions 2 Folders. Great program by the way! But the little tiny bug that I noticed has to do with the Matches/Does not match section.

I noticed that the settings that I set in the program get saved when I close and re-open the program. But the only thing that doesn't get saved, as far as I've noticed, is the "Matches/Does not match" setting. I usually use the "Does not match" setting, so when I'm done with the program, I close it, then when I open it again, I always think that it's still saved at "Does not match".